Are our 'test' records adequate?


Most of us have some favourite records with which to check the health of our systems, or to assess a new component within our systems.
These records are often carried with us whenever we wish to assess a completely foreign system in a different environment. I have my favourite ‘test’ records, some of which I continue to use even after 30 years. I know them (or parts of them), so intimately that I feel confident in my ability to assess a component or complete system after just one listen.
I know other audiophiles who have specialised their ‘test’ records to such an extent that they have different discs to evaluate for Voice, Bass, Large Orchestral, Chamber, Piano, Strings, Drums, Jazz, Rock.
Almost invariably, these vinyl discs are superbly recorded and sound stunning, not just on very fine systems, but also on average systems.
Of course, because each of us knows his own discs so intimately, it is possible to assess the 'omissions'in a foreign system by memory, often to the puzzlement of those to whom the discs are not so well known and to whom the sound had been thoroughly satisfying and impressive?
But I have begun to wonder recently, if this is in fact the most reliable method of evaluating components and systems?
I am sure most of us have heard records on our systems which are almost unlistenable or certainly unpleasant and we have simply placed these discs in the 'never to played' shelf of our storage unit?
But perhaps some of these records might be more revealing than our fabulously recorded 'test' material?
For some time I have been disturbed by two records in my collection, which despite their fame, have sounded poorly (in various parts) despite improvements to my turntable, speakers, amplifiers and cartridges.

Harvest by Neil Young on Reprise (7599-27239-1) has some nicely recorded tracks (Out On The Weekend, Harvest, Heart Of Gold) as well as 2 tracks (Alabama, Words), which have confounded me with their leaness, lack of real bass, vocal distortion and complete lack of depth. The album was recorded at four different venues with three different Producers and those two tracks share the same Producers and venues.
After mounting a Continuum Copperhead arm as well as a DaVinci 12" Grandezza on my Raven AC-3 and carefully setting arm/cartridge geometries with the supplied Wally Tractor and Feikert disc protractor, I was actually able to listen to these tracks without flinching, and could now clearly ascertain the 'out-of-key' harmonies of Stephen Stills together with the clearly over-dubbed lead guitar boosted above the general sound level on the right channel and the completely flat soundstage.

Respighi Pines of Rome (Reiner on the Classic Records re-issue of the RCA LSC-2436) had always brought my wife storming down the hallway at the 'screeching' Finale whilst I scrambled for the volume control to save my bleeding ears.
Again with the two stellar arms and strict geometry, the 117 musicians could not hide the shrill, thin and overloaded recording levels of the horns (particularly the trumpets).
But the wife stayed away and my volume level remained unchanged.

My wonderfully recorded 'test' records had sounded just fine with my previous Hadcock arm but it's only now, when two 'horror' discs can be appreciated, that I truly believe my system 'sings'.
Perhaps we could re-listen to some 'horror' discs in our collection and, with some adjustments to our set-up, make them, if not enjoyable, at least listenable?
halcro

Showing 21 responses by halcro

Congratulations on your system set-up Syntax and a nice tip about Witches Brew.
I agree with you that tonearms are critical in the ability to handle 'difficult' records......regardless of the cartridge.
The more accurate system is the one which reproduces more differences – more contrast between the various program sources.
Having swapped in a Garrott P77 MM cartridge for my ZYX Universe a few days ago, I find a diminution of the differences between various records. The extra detail and information of the Universe I sorely miss however.........there is a 'relaxation' and 'softening' provided by the P77 which makes some poorly recorded material more listenable (enjoyable?).
I'm mulling this over at the moment as there are some disturbing thoughts related to this?
I agree with Raul and Doug.
I can still distinctly remember the tonality and three dimensionality of Rita Coolidge's voice when I first heard it reproduced on the original Martin Logan CLS loudspeakers 20 years ago.
That memory is so palpable it feels like I heard it yesterday.
PS
Did I miss something? Why did Jaybo bring up 'sonic memory' in this thread?
"that the whole analog rig distortions goes lower so now the LPs ( everyone ) sounds with less distortions, more clarity, more transparency, more neutral and with a new " life ".
Spot-on dear Raul!
In fact, I believe as you apparently do, that it is the reduction in 'distortions' throughout the chain....cartridge, arm, turntable, phono- preamp, preamp, amps, speakers, crossovers, cables which ultimately render the poorly recorded records 'listenable'.

Regards....and I am enjoying the music.
That's a great idea Jdaniel!
I too would like to compare records which have challenged other systems.
I feel many audiophiles though, may be reticent to share these for fear of admitting (or exposing) a weakness in their systems?
I hope I'm wrong, for like you, I believe there are many discs out there produced from Master Tapes which have recording faults buried in them.
It would be nice to be forewarned?
I beg to disagree Jaybo.
When I hear a 'foreign' system playing my 'known' test records, I'm not comparing the contributions of each component in that unknown system.
I'm listening for the ambient clues and nuances inherent in individual tracks or movements which I know by heart.
If there is a failure to transmit these aural 'signatures' with the beauty with which I am familiar, then I know something is 'missing' in the assembled system but I don't know exactly what or where?
However the failure in the assembled system may not directly be due to any distortions present, but may well be lack of synergy within the components?
If one were to travel from store to store with Neil Young's Harvest lp and heard the distortions in the 2 tracks I mentioned, it would most likely be caused by arm/cartridge misalignment first and foremost thus rendering further listening of dubious value?
Does that make sense?
Yes Shane....the DaVinci sings as well as the Copperhead.
Agree with you re tonearms and cartridges.
Hate to say though, that I've listened a lot to Gryphon pre-amps and amps and find them the least 'tube-like' of any SS I've heard.
Long live Elvis :)
Here's another one for you Jdaniel.
Tchaikovsky Romeo $ Juliet with Strauss Till Eulenspiegel on LSC RCA re-issue.
Very demanding (especially the Strauss) but very rewarding if everything is 'singing'?
We then compound our mistake by raising these recordings to reference status (pace prof. Johnson), and seek this ‘correct’ presentation from every system we later evaluate; and if it isn’t there, we are likely to dismiss that system as incorrect.
Some very perceptive reflections Tuboo.
Thanks
Dear Raul,
I have the 3 motor Raven and I reverse the phase on the preamp.
I tried the cartridge loading and it sounded best at 47K just as the Garrott Bros recommend but I didn't hear much difference at 60K although below 40K all the 'highs' became dull. 60K is the maximum resistance possible on the DM10.
I could hear very little differences in capacitance loading from 70p to 430p but will try your lower value.
As this is slightly off-topic, I might comment on your blog related to MMs and MCs for I'm sure this will be of interest to you?
Thanks for your input.
Dear Raul,
I spoke too early. Because I had played the Garrott P77s (I have 2) in my system 15 years ago, I forgot that it needed hours of run-in time just as a new cartridge does?
My post was lodged after only 3 hours of listening.
The sound has now changed enormously and I believe that it is serious competition to the great LOMCs like Dyna DV1s and ZYX Universe but without a rising top-end.
Once again Raul, your advice about re-trying MM cartridges in our high-end systems is a wise and timely one.
Thank you.
Another severe test for any system is the Mercury re-issue of Prokofiev's Love for Three Oranges Suite (SR-90006) 45RPM.
Like most Mercury Recordings of the 'Golden Age', the highs are 'hot'.......very 'hot'.
If your system can make this enjoyable (or even listenable), your table/arm/cartridge combination is working well.
Dear Nandric,
Can you be more specific in what these recordings show you and why they are a good test?
After your advice Jdaniel, I pulled out Witches Brew and listened to side 1 starting with Arnold's "Tam O'Shanter".
This is as demanding as The Pines of Rome and I suddenly realised that I had almost exclusively in the past, only listened to side 2 because of the pain.
This extended high frquency emphasis seems to be typical of these early LSC RCAs and I believe that their audio fame had a lot to do with reviewers listening through early tube electronics and sprung turntables like Linn which 'tamed' the prevalent 'highs' and gave the illusion of superb dynamics and detail to otherwise rolled-off amplifiers.
It would be interesting to know how many audiophiles are able to appreciate these early LSC-RCAs through totally solid state electronics being fed by turntables like Rockport, Raven, Walker, Caliburn?
" tweaking using the current best sounding recording (to you on your current system) can often become a more subjective exercise in which inherently really good sound happens to appeal to you."
An excellent point Mapman. The danger here is that one could 'tune' one's system to emphasise those aspects which appeal on favourite records.....and this, as you correctly observe, becomes a subjective exercise whereas 'tuning' one's system to reduce the distortion levels on poor sounding discs (as Raul points out), is an exercise allowing more objectivity?
"How in the world does one know how to assess a system accurately?"
That is precisely the intention of my initial post Jdaniel.
At what point do we say......."This recording is poor, sounds awful on my system and I never want to play it again?"
That 'point' can only be, when we are self-confident enough in our own system's ability to eliminate distortions throughout the chain.
I was physically unable to sit and listen to the finale of the Reiner 'Pines' even with my Raven AC-3, Copperhead/DV1s, DaVinci 12" Grandezza/ZYX Universe until I had eliminated the micro distortions created by tiny errors of cartridge/arm geometry.
If you are able to physically listen to that finale on your system at high listening levels, I'd say your system was doing well.
As for the question on assessing a system accurately?.... playing those 'difficult' records will objectively tell you if something is wrong whilst listening to the 'great-sounding' discs may not?
Hi Shane,
Fair point :)
I personally love tubes.........and sometimes I don't?
It just happens that there are a great many speakers that simply can't be driven adequately by tubes and whilst I hate that, it's a fact of life.
With the new generation of SS electronics recently developed....Halcro, Soulution (see Jon Valin's review http://www.avguide.com/forums/soulution-710 Krell Evo, MBL....as well as the advance in turntables, arms and cartridges, I believe we are hearing more accurately the actual sound of the Mater Tapes and whilst you may not agree with me, I think that the mastering of these early RCAs could have emphasised the treble output of the horns and strings to 'compensate' for 'rolled-off' reproduction equipment at the time.
Listen to the Mercury re-issues of the Stravinsky Ballets to see that good SS amplification can sound sweet and pure when the original source is mastered faithfully?
I understand you Nandric and appreciate your point.
I too get emotional support from my music and I am particularly attached to The Beatles and their music so when an album of their's becomes more unlistenable the better my equipment becomes, I get fairly depressed.
The White Album is, like most of their music, original and inspiring but if you can listen to side 3 (e.g. " Birthday", Yer Blues, Everybody's Got Something To Hide, Helter Skelter) through your belt-drive turntable, modern arm and LOMC cartridge) with the volume turned up, and not cringe in pain but smile, then you've done something right.
Personally I can't.........but on a vintage DD turntable like my 'nude' TT-81 with vintage arms and vintage MM cartridges, I can smile.....broadly.
A good test for those who can take the honest truth?
Another ‘fine’ track to test your system is found on George Harrison’s ‘All Things Must Pass’ box set.
For my money….two of these three discs contain some of his best music. The third disc (side 5 & 6)…..I simply don’t bother with :-(
George partnered with Phil Spector in producing this grand project…..and on side 1 (first disc)……the track 'Wah Wah'…..is a symphony of everything Spector is known for.
A wall of sound….yet a soundstage so shallow that you can walk behind it?
So congested that you wish you could squeeze in some Ventilin….and so thin in frequency response…you wish you could feed it!

If you can get this track to sound ‘listenable’ on your turntable/arm/cartridge……your system will soar on your best albums?
Most are still using their best recorded albums to evaluate systems (see what Fremer and Valin take to Audio Shows)…..but with 2 turntables, 6 arms and 30 cartridges…..I can attest to the fact that it’s the ‘poor’ recordings which most easily sort the chaff from the wheat?
The reason for this I believe is the fact that in the recording studio listening to the Master Tape…..the headroom, lack of arm/cartridge distortion and overall transparency of the source material….leads the engineers and producers to ‘hear’ the recording differently to the end product on vinyl?
I am referring here only to ‘first generation’ cuts from Master Tapes.
3rd, 4th and 5th generation cheaply produced re-issues are not part of this assessment process.
And even really poorly mixed and mastered albums are not worth bothering with.
But all the tracks I mention in this Thread are from generally well produced albums and thus ‘stand out’ as worthy of interest?

If one can ‘master’ the reproduction of these ‘torture tracks’ on one’s system…..I can almost guarantee an overall improvement to the well-recorded ones.

Has anyone heard any other ‘torture track’ examples?